😂😂😂

And the Chinese in 3 months!

better late than never, honestly wouldnt mind the Chinese approach here tbh :)

They finished building their first highspeed rail network in 1964...

@@radomu1 And proceeded to supercede the west in expedited manner

Exactly!!!!! You’ve said it all. I think it is needed

Paul Taylor it’s 108 woodlands not 300 and they are planting twice as many trees than are cut down. I’m not sure what else they can do to satisfy people. There is a massive saving on emissions by switching to rail rather than operating equivalent flights. People moan about a third runway at Heathrow and general airport expansion but the alternative solution of high speed rail people also moan about.

Paul Taylor Well it’s being built since no one has any better ideas than congested skies and roads. High speed rail is one of the most efficient forms of transport, I’d rather see a network of HSR linking the country than more roads and airports. All that can be done now is hold them to account. I don’t think its ideal but it’s certainly better than the alternative, unless you think the country’s population is going to shrink substantially.

I spoke to one of the company's behind HS2 , they said this doesn't count as a long distance railway so stuff like electromagnetic trains or bullet trains would be waste of money. But I highly doubt this with london to Birmingham still taking a hour and the amount time it's taking to build it this.

The only reason for building up the huge infra is because the UK is behind Japan and China?

There are more jobs moving from London to Birmingham since they announced HS2, so who is in who's commuter belt? Also it is projected that is will quadruple Birmingham Airport's capacity and stop an expansion at Heathrow. Lastly, I'm young and foresaw this so I have saved every penny I could, told close friends and family to do the same and we have bought property in Digbeth near Curzon Street in anticipation of HS2 so I can build apartments, even had planning approved. We can either have you moaning, bullshit attitude and doom merchanery, or you can go out and do shit. HS2 is the biggest thing for Brum since the canals, granted it probably favours Brum above any other city in the country but we can't change geography now can we?

Like there were ever any affordable homes in 2020!

Load of crap it puts London in the Birmingham commuter belt as more firms move out of expensive properties in London and set up shop in Birmingham.

@@allovdem hate to break it to you but Brum airport is not “quadrupling” rather aiming for 40% increase in passengers through just building a bigger departure lounge - even that is now on hold 😂

Britain is no more

Amazing what can be achieved with limitless slave labour and no obligation to compensate those whose homes are destroyed to make way for the construction works.....

@@nikonfan2407 Not true.

@@baguette_connoisseur Care to elaborate?

Chinese government does not own slaves fpr railway construction. They are all ordinary Chinese citizens. Regarding compensations, the government does it just as in any Western country.

@Tobby Isiba thank you so much haven't laughed that much in ages

"Boris Johnson can he fix it? Boris Johnson... No he can't."

What if he is Bob the builder?

LOL I suppose many were saying the same about the channel tunnel first proposed in 1802! Based on the 186 year wait for Chunnel construction to actually begin - we could have some element of HS2 by the next century. Of course despite being over budget the channel tunnel only ended up costing a mere £4.65 Billion. A drop in the bucket comparing the current estimate of HS2 at £88.7 Billion [a safe bet to believe that will easily top £100 Billion before opening]. Which one do people believe provides more value to Britain? What else could £100 Billion be better invested in?

It took UK decades to find out high speed railway needed their dedicate tracks

keiming227 no we sold the plans to the Italians

@@saudiprince6532 The APT was never going to go any faster than 125mph, the 390s made by the Italians can do 140 but are still limited to 125 today

lol

Let me guess you got that from the Daily Mail

I disagree, it was a good idea to wait for a recession when the economy needs a big project like this to stimulate it.

Grey Wild Wolf Are we sure that’s all that’s needed for the next 50 years?

I'm a moron, also they didn’t wait for or foresee COVID to start it though

It would be more expensive trying to make the current mainlines high speed than just built a new one from scratch. A bit like how it's often cheaper to buy a new car than get an old car repaired or upgraded.

Not to mention that you just can't increase capacity on existing lines anywhere near that realised building a new line. Let alone increasing capacity on a line as optimised as the WCML. The only way to optimise the WCML more is pretty much rip the whole thing up and replace it, and even then it wouldn't increase the capacity anywhere near as much as a brand new line would/will.

This is fueling investment across the network.

Liam I was wondering about that; can you give us a feeling for how it’s doing that? Because that’s what’s lacking in the public perception.

@@dphuntsman HS2 will give the single biggest boost in capacity to our rail network ever, this means there will finally be room for more local commuter trains, more frequent stopping services at more stations, more available platforms at existing major stations such as Birmingham New Street to allow new/old lines to open/reopen; thus allowing new/closed stations to reopen. All this is possible thanks to HS2. Not to mention all the extra work in building tram lines connecting numerous communities to HS2 in Birmingham, Solihull, Derby and Nottingham.

Railways aren't infrastructure ???

@@keiming2277 yes, but why spend billions on a project that I guarantee will go over budget. 🤷‍♂️The rest of the rail network should have been upgraded with better trains and track infrastructure. HS2 will only benefit Londanistan.

So yes, HS2 is necessary

@Grey Wild Wolf R u agitated?

@Grey Wild Wolf not their fault that you live in an irrelevant backwater

The Victorians had an efficient public transport system.

Suzie M true🤣, actually, much worse today

No it doesn't. The Victorian actually had trams, but the Edwardians and early Elizabeth II-ians ripped them out in favour of disgusting dirty buses.

Because there are no economic facts to back up that argument

Bruh did you not listen, he literally said there will be a loss of jobs

How will there be a net loss?

I think many commenters here are politically motivated and emotional. Too many jabs and not enough consideration. I don't deny that the report MENTIONS that there is opposition. However it only mentions two reasons. Loss of "ancient woodlands" and "overall net loss of jobs." The woodlands seems more obvious, and I think its very important, but more time could be spent on that issue and its importance. The lady they interviewed mentioned mitigation, what does she envision? What exactly are the mitigation efforts, what do they cost, and can more than one set of mitigations be undertaken? For example, moving and preserving some old growth trees while simultaneously engaging in new planting. As far as the jobs, I don't think anyone has hard facts in either direction, but this reporting just states the two assertions without any discussion of the proponents arguments for or against those positions. Forget the accuracy - we didn't actually hear either sides argument. I would like to hear some of their arguments and a little counterpoint as well. Historically infrastructure is a good thing, expanding economies over the long term, and usually governments begin infrastructure late and don't take those projects far enough. For example in my home region Washington DC, there was a highway plan that proposed building two highway rings around DC. One was built called "The Beltway" and the other has not been built - though one county built a portion of it. As a result of this partial implementation of that plan, the DC metropolitan region has some of the worst traffic in the US as well as abominable public transit infrastructure. You do not want to replicate that. I think that this rail system is not nearly extensive enough, that it is being built too slowly, and I also believe you need to pay more attention to ecological impacts. Lastly while I think infrastructure always positively impacts the economy in the long term, perhaps government can do more to stimulate that growth in the short and mid term. Regarding ecological impacts, the UK should consult Brazilian experts. Brazil has worked out that you can not plant forest in regular patterns and replace their natural functionality... more importantly they are the most advanced in how to plant with the right sorts of irregularity to recreate ancient forests and jungles. A cooperative partnership could probably settle all the ecological issues with HS2 and help Brazil invest in protecting the Amazon - a ancient wooded region they must develop, but at present Brazil can not afford to do so sustainably. That could create net wins which impact us all positively regardless of where we live.

If anything we need to be digging up some roads to improve cycling, walking and public transport. Even with a move to electric, roads are an environmental catastrophe with current usage.

Spain already have high speed train world best at 6 place why you don't want England make a high speed train?

@@isma4507 labor unions

@@isma4507 My point is they should have made one 20 years ago. So much time gets wasted uttering about the country in these slow trains - they go at walking speed sometimes, it's utterly ridiculous. In Germany, where I'm from, you can travel 250 miles and back in one day, in England that takes like a week.

@@RebekkaHay aww ok ya British train so slow yes same here in Spain high speed train why do you live in England Germany far better country than England

@@isma4507 I am from Berlin but I live in England now.

they're building a 10 mile tunnel under the Chilterns, and 13 miles more into London

Just because you pay taxes that doesn't mean you should benefit from everything the government invests in, that would be impossible

It will reduce that amount of cars on road and therefore less traffic.

@@JohnSmith-vg6hb no it would not be impossible. It would just require a lot smaller less centralised government with a massively reduced budget.

@@simonmorgan225 sure but that won't happen

🤣👍

@Patriotic Pride You can stick that finger where the sun don't shine.

@Greenpoloboy3 ignore him. He is a saddo who likes his own comments on multiple accounts. He needs to get a life.

@@Josh-oy7zp Thank you bro :) Missed this comment, but he seems to follow me around. Everything you just said though is 100% correct! :)

@Greenpoloboy3 Cheers mate! 👍

Sure but how will things be in 10,20,50 years etc? You have to anticipate the future with projects like these and neither rail demand nor population are set to fall.

From what I've seen, this is also about just adding capacity, as the current lines are saturated.

And it's expected to be a massive white elephant that will bleed money uncontrolably

@Andy N haha true

I always see your quotes. Nice one mate.

That's Stan lees quote not yours

They could use the hyper loop tbh but no, Britain is years behind most other countries

how is the quiet noise from an electric train a problem, also the majority of the track passes through areas with nobody living around it. Only about 1/4 of the line passes through towns, the rest is in Forrests

​@Grey Wild Wolf Europeans have double decker railways

Double deck trains take longer to empty so have to sit in stations longer and not moving. And more importantly they're not very accessible for people with disabilities. The 400m trains will accomodate 1,100 people so with 18 trains per hour thats 19,800 passengers per hour. Current Euston capacity is 11,300, once this is running this goes up to 34,900.

How much did they say it cost again?

@@fingerscrossed2453 Who are 'they'? The official figures say it is estimated to cost £88bn

@@fingerscrossed2453 Of course it will cost a lot of money. You think China and Japan made their high speed railway networks with no funds? It is worth it bro. Also, there'd be no more people saying "look at x country with high speed trains, must be so convenient. Wish I could live there."

@@pepehimovic3135 erm no actually. It costs like 90billion and will benefit shaving 25 minute off a commute cross country. It would have been beneficial to reverse the beeching cuts with that money.

@@fingerscrossed2453 Stop being so shortsighted mate. Consider the long-term future. Let's say this generation makes losses from this project being completed, future generations will still be much better off having the HS2 to their disposal. You say the HS2 will shave some time off the commute, but what about how it will significantly reduce traffic? Stimulate travel? It will be a major boost to the economy. Maybe you need to go to a country with mass high-speed rail networks to realize how much better off we are with the HS2?

XR has a group within it that are in favour of HS2

would you stop all development to save all wildlife, maybe we shouldnt have cleared the forests to build our cities? this nonsense is so annoying, especially in a country like ours, less than half the size of France but the same population

They will make less noise than present day trains and are Electric

and? are you really saying that a bunny being frightened is more important than saving time traveling between 3 major cities and improving the towns along them?

@@staycgirlsitsgoingdown2 Yes, don't know what bunny you are referring to but was it scared when the M6 was built, plus HS2 is not improving any city.

it is a joke electric high speed trains should be the very thing extinction rebillians should be supporting

Actually everything there was accurate at the time the video was uploaded

WCML will still see same amount of traffic most likely including the current high speed service from Avanti.

@@benwilson428 hs2 replaces the high speed trains on WCLM

@@samuelthornton9179 Neh. They will compliment each other. HS2 doesn't go Glasgow so there is one reason to keep the WCML fleet

No they did not, we had steam locos and early diesel locos, max speed 100mph, HS2 max speed 250 MPH

@@peterwilliamallen1063 Yes they did. Research it.

@@peterwilliamallen1063 kzfaq.info/get/bejne/h8eWacWSqtuUj6s.html

@@fightermma Well they didn't do a good job did they, as the railfreight companies want it, even Milton keynes wants it so they can have a better train service.

@@peterwilliamallen1063 You were wrong end of.

Why shouldn't he be?

@@alexanderm2220 I think he may have some reasons, but I am always surprised how he holds the blow and stays positive. he has so much energy

And the difference between them is that Europe have separate lines for high speed and is nationalised.

Trains are safer than cars.

@@samuelthornton9179 and....... There have been train accidents before...

It won’t cost you to wish for a good thing than bad. Be positive.

@@weiniweldemichael4897 Hell No Positive Guys are Simps

It's not like China uses slave labour or anything and a complete disregard for environmental impact they just go. Haha workers go brrrr

@@charliechuck1341 care to show details and explain? Trust but verify

@@sw36jl uhm wtf😂 I need no example are you a member of the CCP? Cause if your so blind as not to notice that the majority of the Chinese people are being paid that little that they might as well be slaves I have no hope for you. I'm therefore also sure that your completely oblivious to the fact that the Chinese have racially targeted and killed more people in concentration camps than in the Holocaust...

The trains won't be running for a few years, we'll be back to normal by then.

They fail to focus on the job losses as a result of lockdown

The Brums? The English? Who?

We can afford both, but we like electing people who lie to us and say we can't. Also cancelling HS2 wouldn't make the money available, it's money borrowed over a long period of time against the actual project. The WCML may very well get you from London to Manchester reasonably, but your luxury of an efficient journey comes at the expense of Tamworth having a measly hourly service and Porthmadog having a laughable 2-hourly service.

No you wrong grow up

Really mate? Hope your joking 😂 Europe is a continent, we haven't moved continent

@@matthowells6382 lol. Well, continents are not only a geographical but also a political matter. Thou, if the UK decided to abbandon its neighbouring community, it shouldn't count itself as a part of Europe.

@@alfredocoelho8088 That’s like saying Switzerland isn’t in Europe

@@happyhalloween7766 but Switzerland has a far more fraternal, economical, commercial and social relation with continental Europe... The UK has evidently severed its connection.

@@alfredocoelho8088 That doesn’t mean it’s not on the continent of Europe 💀

It won't be slower at all?

@@isnitjustkit according to everything I've seen (official and unofficial) my trip to my son, who lives just outside Coventry), will be longer if I use HS2. I can see why this would be correct as the planning of HS2 was seriously flawed.

Not your money becuase it isnt being funded by taxes

@@isnitjustkit yes it is

@@markymark7200 No it isnt. Infrastructure is funded by loans backed by future returns generated by said investment. Tax money doesn't go into constructing any road, canal, railway, anything like that, maintenance sure but not construction

@@isnitjustkit do your research

@@markymark7200 I have, how else do you think my comments are so much more detailed and indepth than your sloppy 3 word responses are?

PAHAHAHAH